<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1979 (10) TMI 17 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29577</link>
    <description>The court rejected the challenge to the notice under section 143(3) based on the ultra vires argument against section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act. It upheld the validity of the provision, emphasizing its role in preventing tax evasion and regulating business transactions. The petitioner was directed to establish eligibility for exceptions under Rule 6DD to claim deductions, and the petition was dismissed without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Mar 2010 17:52:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68574" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1979 (10) TMI 17 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29577</link>
      <description>The court rejected the challenge to the notice under section 143(3) based on the ultra vires argument against section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act. It upheld the validity of the provision, emphasizing its role in preventing tax evasion and regulating business transactions. The petitioner was directed to establish eligibility for exceptions under Rule 6DD to claim deductions, and the petition was dismissed without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Income Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Oct 1979 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=29577</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>